For example, on religious liberty he said he was conscious of his audience, Americans, for whom "Religious liberty is their first dogma!" and he was putting an argument ad hominem to them, citing V2 and pointing out that even that does not teach the religious liberty which Conciliarists preach and believe.
Taking this out of its context, CNS made it appear that Bishop Fellay was giving his own assessment of Dignitatis Humanae. He wasn't.
So now +Fellay decides to cozy up to the Americanist heresy, defined and
condemned over a century ago, yet now it's suddenly okay? And we're supposed
to roll over and take it? What's with this? Does he think we're this stupid?
The mere fact that a lot of Americans are too poorly educated in the Faith to know that Americanism is a defined heresy, +Fellay, who is not an American, and ought to know better, instead of taking this opportunity to educate (in which case, of course, the smarmy CNS editor would have deleted this segment, but whatever!) He chose instead to take sides with a CONDEMNED HERESY in order to "get along" with Americans in ERROR, and now this is an EXCUSE????
The CNS editor allowed this comment by a seminarian to stay in:
The decisive factor in making my decision was the reception of Vatican II. There were in Vatican II some points like religious freedom or ecuŠ¼enism that were completely incompatible with the traditional teaching of the Church before the council. And because of that it seemed logical for me me to enter a society that openly opposes and criticizes those doctrinal errors that are dangerous to the Catholic Faith.
Go to about 2:05 minutes. Why is this seminarian able to say things so clearly, and not be edited out by CNS? If an seminarian can do it, why can't the Superior General?
Topic: Discussion with Bp. Fellay (John Lanes posts) (Read 4574 times)